All Episodes
Previous Next
June 4, 2024 - Dinesh D'Souza
48:37
A FAUSTIAN BARGAIN Dinesh D’Souza Podcast Ep 846
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hey everyone, I'm Danielle D'Souza Gill.
I will be hosting Dinesh's podcast while he is away this week, so I'm super excited.
We have so much to get to.
If you're a regular Dinesh D'Souza listener, then you've probably heard me on here before guest hosting, although it has been a little while because I am frequently busy being a mom to my daughter Marigold.
She is 10 months old and I also support my husband's campaign for U.S. Congress in North Texas.
I'm the author of two books, one on pro-life called The Choice, The Abortion Divide in America, and one about Christianity called Why God, An Intelligent Discussion on the Relevance of Faith.
But I always love coming on and guest hosting the show.
The best way you can find out more about me is to follow me on Facebook, Instagram, True Social, X, all the places.
I'm at Danielle D'Souza Gill.
That's where you can find my videos, thoughts, all those things.
Well, we have a lot to get to today, and today we are going to be talking about the importance of morality and clinging to our social issues within the Republican Party.
We'll also be speaking with political strategist Ryan Gerdusky about the Trump verdict, Sarah Sanders' education reform, and various news in foreign policy.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza podcast.
The times are crazy.
In a time of confusion, division, and lies, we need a brave voice of reason, understanding, and truth.
This is the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast.
But the Republican Party focus exclusively on low taxes and fiscal responsibility?
Or should Republicans continue to champion social issues?
What is at stake for citizens in a country where the major political parties abandon questions of morality?
Considering the figure of Karl Marx and the ills of Marxism is a helpful start to answering these questions.
Now, when people reference the heirs of Marxism, they are spoiled for choice because there are so many to choose from.
There's the oversimplification of history, the cynical anthropology, and there's the assumption that invisible evolutionary forces overpower individual human agency.
But overall, one of the most obvious errors of Marxism is its naked attempt to universalize the personal, petty grudges of its author, Karl Marx.
It's a well-known and sad fact of life that people who commit evil seem to profit more than those who observe moral codes.
Even the highly moral Judeo-Christian tradition acknowledges this in the books of Job and Ecclesiastes.
Sometimes evil triumphs.
Sometimes wicked people profit.
Sometimes the corrupt abuse their power over the just.
Sometimes good people suffer.
Marx saw this same dynamic, and instead of taking a nuanced approach like our major faith traditions, he applied a bigot's logic.
To Marx, history wasn't a struggle of good versus evil.
It was a struggle between the haves and the have-nots.
He viewed traditional values as a blight to be eradicated.
God and his morality, his order, are understood by Marx to be a con, a way to cheat others.
No doubt due to his skepticism regarding religion, Marx had a particular affinity for fictional depictions of the devil, the original rebel against outmoded traditional ideas of goodness.
And Paul Kengor notes in his book, The Devil and Karl Marx, Communism's Long March of Death, Deception and Infiltration, that Marx had, quote, a special preference for Mephistopheles, the demon who makes a deal with Dr. Fenton.
Faustus. Marx was especially fond of Mephistopheles' line from Faust, everything that exists deserves to perish.
Ken Gore continues, this is no surprise for it reflects the very thinking of the man who in letters called for the ruthless criticism of all that exists.
Marx is the man who, in the Communist Manifesto, declared that communism seeks to abolish the present state of things, and who at the close of the manifesto called for the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions,
Ken Gore concludes. Marx's repurposing of evil as social justice and his broad-brush approach ensures a rich man's act of charity may never be viewed as benevolent, while a poor man's violence against the wealthy cannot be viewed as thuggish butchery.
By all accounts, Karl Marx was a bitter, angry misanthrope who had to rely on the charity of his wealthy friend and collaborator, Frederick Ingalls, just to make rent and feed his miserable wife and children.
Marx's banner of personal grievances and petty jealousies attracts the jealous and disaffected among both the haves and the have-nots.
And by uniting the hard-hearted and narrow-minded, Marx's ideas are a political rallying point for the self-righteous and morally ambivalent who are searching for something to cling to.
What has followed from his dreams of destruction is a trail of death and blood unparalleled in human history.
It's a chilling object lesson showing how horribly wrong things can go when we jettison traditional values and morality for what justifies our most narcissistic and misguided desires.
This error, this temptation to universalize one's personal grudges, should have been obvious to the people of Marxist time.
It's a temptation that is not at all unique to the person of Karl Marx or his period of history.
Indeed, every person of every generation is faced with the same situation where he must contend with the notion of that thoughtlessly following unbridled desires for revenge or envy might just lead to committing an intrinsically evil action.
It's an unfortunate reality of human life that people tend to rationalize their bad decisions instead of submitting to what in the heart of hearts they know to be the choice that is right, even if it is difficult.
From abortion to drug abuse, from porn to transgenderism, these evils survive because people believe the lie they tell themselves to rationalize it.
It's a necessary lie in their minds, a door they must pass through in order to justify a bad choice.
It serves a greater good, right?
Why, it's only natural, don't you know?
Hey, that's not explicitly condemned in the Bible.
Such lies aren't believed because they ring true or even seem plausible.
They're believed for no other reason than that they make bad life choices more palatable.
At no time, however, do these lies come without consequences.
There are, for example, larger implications when society embraces the concept that certain types of people are less human than others, as with the arguments justifying both slavery and abortion.
And while in the here and now, it's possible for some to profit materially from embracing such moral license, it eventually comes to a head in horrific ways, as it has in any country that has adopted communism.
The evils perpetuated by communist countries illustrate the bloodshed.
They illustrate that hardwired into the Faustian bargain of convincing yourself that morality is not central to human flourishing or to politics is the acceptance of a diminished understanding of what it means to be human.
Paul Kengor gives the following statistics for the number of human beings killed in communist regimes.
He writes, quote, In 1999, the Black Book of Communism endeavored to attempt the impossible task of tabulating a Marxist-Leninist death toll in the 20th century.
It came up with a figure approaching 100 million.
So here's the breakdown.
USSR, 20 million deaths.
China, 65 million deaths.
Vietnam, 1 million deaths.
North Korea, 2 million deaths.
Cambodia, 2 million deaths.
Eastern Europe, 1 million deaths.
Latin America, 150,000 deaths.
Africa, 1.7 million deaths.
Afghanistan, 1.5 million deaths.
The international communist movement and communist parties not in power, about 10,000 deaths.
Paul Kengor writes this in The Devil and Karl Marx's communism's long march of death, deception, and infiltration.
Progressives do not have a problem with these numbers.
The idea that human life is not sacred has been a plank in the left-wing party platform for a very long time.
But recently, there are those on the right who are buckling under the temptation to embrace similar lies.
This is unfortunate, for it is the Republican Party that has traditionally defended the dignity of human beings.
It can be tempting to give in because we just want to win.
But Republicans protect the life and liberty of all Americans, whether it was the day of Stevens pushing for full emancipation of the slaves and working tirelessly for the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868, Or Senator Jesse Helms fighting in 1976 for an affirmation of the individual rights of the unborn to be added to the Republican platform.
Within the Republican Party, there's always been a group that holds life to be sacred.
However, there are those now who think it's more important to support views based on their popularity with the media.
Currently, among Republicans, there is an ongoing discussion concerning whether or not to focus primarily on fiscal matters and just walk away from messy social issues.
Yet again, familiar bromides about choice and personal need or convenience are raised as justification for ignoring the sanctity of human life.
Failing to dispassionately acknowledge the larger moral question at play here invites future inhuman travesties.
What's at stake is a total deconstruction of the very idea of humanity.
Imagine a nightmare world where clones are grown to harvest spare organs, where the line is blurred between human and animal, and animal and human, by mixing the genes of both.
Where the possibility of designer babies based on gene selection once again raises the ugly specter of eugenics?
Do we as a people, as a civilization, have the moral fiber to resist such temptations?
Or are we like the followers of Marx who were sent off to the slave camps, doomed to learn the hard way the price of putting self before God?
Again, those who would seek to advance the cause of conservatism by detaching it from the very values of morality which inform the movement only set it on course to meet the same doom that leftism currently faces.
Our values are not merely opinions or a collection of shared preferences.
They are the result of ages and ages of tradition, of observations, and discussion by the brightest and most penetrating minds of humanity that really go back to the soul.
They contain within them the wisdom to understand reality as it is, not as we would have it to be.
Many of our values are believed to be the result of divine inspiration, so they ground humanity in a created reality while at the same time connecting us to the author of our very being in that same reality.
At the very least, we can agree that abandoning the traditional belief in the sanctity of human life or in the two genders has historically led to unimaginably horrific outcomes.
We see slavery, genocide, horrible things justified.
Our values are therefore not an obstacle to human flourishing, but a necessary component for our continued success.
Why would we throw that away?
There's truly nothing new under the sun, and when it comes to the choice to abide by or throw out our moral values when they seem to be blocking us from some perceived good, we are trending on a well-worn path.
But it would be nice if, just for once, it didn't take large-scale human tragedy to wake us up to the dangers of where this path ultimately leads.
We need to reject the deal being offered by Mephistopheles, no matter how tempting it is.
You might have heard Mike Lindell and MyPillow no longer have the support of their box stores or shopping channels the way they used to.
They've been part of this cancel culture.
And so they want to pass the savings directly on to you by having a $25 extravaganza.
Now, when Mike started MyPillow, it was just a one product company, just the pillow.
But with the help of his dedicated employees, Mike now has hundreds of products, some of which you may not even know about.
So to get the word out, I want to invite my viewers and listeners to check out their $25 extravaganza, two-pack multi-use MyPillows, $25, MyPillow sandals, $25, six-pack towel sets, $25, brand new four-pack dish towels, you guessed it, $25.
And for the first time ever, the premium MyPillows with the all-new Giza fabric, just $25.
By the way, orders over $75 get free shipping as well.
The amazing offer won't last long, so act now.
Call 800-876-0227.
The number again, 800-876-0227.
Or go to MyPillow.com.
Make sure to use the promo code.
It's D-I-N-E-S-H Dinesh.
The hardest part about weight loss?
Getting started. But once you get started, you'll be so happy you did.
Are you ready to lose weight but like not sure where to start?
I understand. Debbie and I were right where you are a year and a half ago.
Let me tell you why we chose PhD Weight Loss and Nutrition and why I so highly recommend their program.
First, Dr. Ashley Lucas has her PhD in Chronic Disease and Sports Nutrition.
Her program is based on years of research.
It's science-based. Second, The PhD program starts with nutrition, but it's so much more.
They know that 90% of permanent change comes from the mind, and they work on eliminating the reason you gained this weight in the first place.
There are no shortcuts, no pills, no injections, just solid science-based nutrition and behavior change.
And finally, Probably most important, it works.
I lost 27 pounds.
Debbie lost 25. We haven't gained the weight back.
The best thing about this program, they have an 85% success rate of their clients maintaining their weight loss for life.
They provide elevated maintenance support for you through the PhD alumni community, which will give you the support you need to keep this weight loss off forever.
So if you're ready to lose weight for the last time, call 864- 864-644-1900 to get started.
You can also go online at myphdweightloss.com.
Do what we did.
Do what hundreds of my listeners and viewers have done.
Call today. It's 864-644-1900.
Before I tell you about a very special offer, I want to first explain why the product I'm going to be talking about is absolutely worth it without the discount.
I don't take any particular supplement just because I get a discount.
Anything as important as nutrition, I'll research it first.
Now if you go to balanceofnature.com, scroll down to their homepage, We're good to go.
Balance of nature, fruits and veggies in a capsule.
So take their risk-free money-back challenge today.
Use my special promo code to get a 35% off your first order, plus a free fiber and spice supplement and free shipping.
So here's the number to call, 800-246-8751.
The number again, 800-246-8751.
Or you can go to balanceofnature.com.
When you use discount code America, you'll get my special offer.
That's 35% off, plus free fiber and spice, plus free shipping.
So we are now going to dive into news of the day and talk to one of our favorite political strategists, Ryan Gurdusky.
He's the author of the National Populist Newsletter on Substack.
He's also an author.
And Ryan, yeah, thanks for being here.
Good. Thanks for having me.
And a friend of yours. So we can get better than mine.
Oh, thank you.
Well, I am just so outraged about the Trump verdict, obviously, which we talked about a lot already.
But I want to get your thoughts on how you feel like it's going to impact the 2024 general election.
Because I've kind of heard a lot of contradicting...
I've heard Republicans saying that now Trump's ahead and this is going to help him because a lot of people are so outraged by this going on.
And I am very outraged.
But I've also heard Democrats kind of acting like Maybe this is going to hurt him with independence.
Obviously, they're trying to really push this felon thing.
They're saying, oh, you're a felon all the time.
And they want to really push that language, maybe because women don't like that language or something.
So they seem to think it's a win.
And I guess if I were to put myself into the mind of the Democrats, I would think to myself, well, Why would I be doing this if it doesn't help me?
So they obviously have some kind of end game in doing this.
But at the same time, I've heard Republicans saying that, you know, it's led him to fundraise a lot and things like that, other wins.
So maybe there are some pros and cons.
Obviously, at the end of the day, I think it's totally a perversion of justice and wrong.
And so regardless of the outcome, it should have never happened.
But how do you think it's going to impact the election?
And what should we do with this?
Right, so there's a lot of moving parts.
First of all, he's raised close to $300 million since the verdict, which is, of course, a ton of money in such a short period of time.
So that's a very positive thing for Trump and on Trump's behalf.
There have been no high quality polls since the verdict.
And I think that that's very important because what we're going to see and what we have seen over the last few days is a lot of internet polls.
Which are far less accurate, far less scientific, coming out, showing movement.
The Harris poll showed Trump get a one-point bump.
Morning Consult, I believe, was a two-point bump from Biden.
And then another poll had a one-point bump from Biden.
But it was fairly stagnant.
And I think that that's right.
I think that overall, I have never in my own life met someone whose opinion on Donald Trump was not made.
And anyone who thought that Trump was, you know, a pastor who was, you know, going to church on Sundays and he was secretly meeting with porn stars.
Everyone kind of knew and knows who Donald Trump is and has a strong opinion on him.
I don't know anyone who mentioned the trial in my life who already didn't have an opinion whether they liked him or didn't like him.
I don't see how it's gonna sway many voters, especially given that it's going to be months before the election.
Now, if he has to spend the next six months in prison and he's not able to campaign, will that change the polls?
Very possibly. But as of right now, we've not seen anything to suggest a giant shift in polls.
We've not seen any state polling or any national polling to say that it's going to move numbers in any serious way, either which way.
He obviously has raised a ton of money from it, and that's the only hard information we have post-verdict.
Yeah. If they were, let's say, to jail him and he couldn't campaign anymore, or they were to put him on some kind of house arrest, things like that, how would we move forward?
Because one of his rallies, those are one of the biggest things he does to get people out.
I guess how do we move forward looking at the fact that this is so unjust?
Yeah. Yeah, I mean, how do you do a convention when you have a candidate in jail?
Well, possibly. You know, he'll just go into appeal immediately, and they'll hope that it'll be a quick appeal process.
And I think that's what you do as fast as you possibly can do it.
In 1924, one of the candidates running for president...
Debs, I think his last name was, I think he was the Socialist Party candidate.
He was in prison at the time, and he did receive a million votes.
I think he won Wisconsin, actually.
So it's not completely unprecedented in American history to have someone run for president from jail.
It's been a very long time.
But yeah, I think that would start affecting people slowly but surely.
I think people are outraged by it right now, and a lot of people are motivated to I know in my own personal life, two or three never-Trump Republicans who hate Donald Trump, and they donated to him over the course of the weekend because they were so outraged.
So, you know, if that is, you know, if that's changing some people's minds, some maybe like Haley voters or some DeSantis voters who couldn't get on board with Trump, if it's changing their mind because they feel like the system has been so corrupted, then we'll see those over time.
But I would really tell your audience and anybody else just Don't get so reflective over a poll number, like an immediate poll number, because we're going to see things change slowly, not quickly.
And remember, most polls have not changed really since November of 2023.
In like cases like, you know, Georgia and other states, they haven't moved since May of 2023.
That was the last time Biden led in any of those polls.
So to see a dramatic shift that we're going to see them, I'm kind of hesitant to believe that.
Hmm. When you think about the issues, let's say open border as one example, do you think that people will vote based off of things like that?
Or do you feel like it's truly about what people already think of Trump versus what they already think of Biden?
I mean, where do the issues play into this?
Because it seems like the Democrats want to shift everything away from the issues.
They want to just focus on Trump being convicted and maybe kind of gloss over all of Biden's failures or something.
So should we take it back to those issues or...
Is it mostly about these two people?
I think it depends on how comfortable you are in life.
If you make a very, very solid salary or you're retired and you don't have to worry about the cost of living and you're in a gated community or in a very secure subject, I don't imagine inflation matters much to you or open borders or the failure of the Afghan withdrawal or the ongoing crisis.
War in Ukraine or whatever of the other cases, you know, you really can focus on your hatred for Donald Trump because it is the only thing that means anything to you because you're really not affected by a lot of things in the outside world.
You know, since 1972, Joe Biden has the second highest inflationary four-year period of any president's 1972 over 50 years.
Only one who had a higher inflationary period was Jimmy Carter.
And the president who had the lowest inflationary period over four years was Donald Trump.
I think Donald Trump had a 5% inflationary period on major spending, while Joe Biden's had 20%.
And that came from the Washington Post.
That is... Those are the issues that is going to motivate a lot of working class people to vote for Donald Trump.
They really feel it in their pocketbooks.
Donald Trump's campaign and the RNC's challenge is how do you, one, motivate people to vote who don't have a very big voter history, and two, how do you make sure they're registered to vote?
Those are two really, really, really important issues.
People who have a very high voter propensity, people who vote all the time in every election are leaning more and more towards Joe Biden.
The way Donald Trump makes up the ground and he makes up the ground big, and that's why he leads in not only state polls, but national polls, is among lower propensity voters, they're working class people.
They don't have time to go vote.
Maybe they don't even know what election day is sometimes.
Making sure that they're aware, making sure they go vote, making sure you go to places like mobile home communities.
I know that may sound like a joke, but it's really not.
There's 20 million people in mobile home communities.
Making sure there is rural America, that gun owners associations, that church groups, all those organizations that lean heavily Republican actually showing up on election day.
That will be the difference.
And then the icing on the cake and the sprinkles on the cake will be all the Hispanics and Asians and some black voters who are moving towards Republicans.
Yeah. So that's really what these parties should be focusing on, right?
In these different areas is how do we register more voters?
Because sometimes I feel like they get so focused on maybe infighting or they're focused on all these other things.
When in reality, it's like we just need to register more people and make sure that they actually go and vote for other Republicans.
Well, I want to ask you about some other news that's going on.
I saw that you wrote recently about Sarah Huckabee Sanders So tell us a little bit about that.
Yeah, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, this was in the Arkansas Democrat newspaper, which is, I think, one of the biggest papers in Arkansas.
Sarah Huckabee Sanders wrote a letter to all 50 governors, 49 governors, 50 herself, obviously, and asking to do major education reform because she's very concerned, and this is a conversation you're seeing being played a lot globally around the West, not just in America, Over the concern over phones with children.
It's become a bigger and bigger and bigger problem where kids' attention spans are shorter, anxieties have increased, social media obviously influences them, they have the phone in class.
Classrooms. So she wants to focus on how do you minimize or minimize the impact of smart technology in the classroom?
Obviously, you still need it there.
Kids have to know how to use technology or they're going to go into the workforce in the 21st century.
But how do you minimize it for the younger generation, the younger years?
How do you make sure that social media is clamped down on for younger children who are so easily and heavily influenced by it?
And how do you try to promote and push outside play as much as possible?
Governor Sanders has said that she's going to be the education governor.
And you're seeing this a lot in the South.
This is a very underappreciated story.
the South, which has trended far beyond the rest of the country with education. You saw immense gains in Mississippi over the last five years with third grade reading scores and reading education.
You're seeing a lot of investment in other states.
Superintendent Ryan Walters in Oklahoma is doing a lot of stuff and trying a lot of stuff. South Carolina is looking at reinvesting in early childhood education. But Sarah Huckabee Sanders has said, I'm going to make this my issue.
And she really wants to change the way education is working for younger kids to sit there and not only to promote them doing better in school, but promote a healthier, you know, mental health, because there's a lot of problems with young people, depression, anxiety, suicidal tendencies, and a lot of people have linked it to social media and the smartphone.
It's so, so scary that even thinking back to when we were kids, like nothing was like this as far as technology.
Technology has just taken off like so much, even if you look at a couple years difference.
Like you could have been in middle school or college or whatever when social media became a thing.
But it's like if you're in elementary school today, you're introduced to all kinds of things on the internet that we never had.
You're right. I was born in 1987.
So we had a personal computer with a dial-up.
And you could only use it when no one was on the phone.
We weren't on the internet for very long periods of time, so I just grew up without it.
But I have employees who are 13, 15 years younger than me now.
And I mentioned one time seeing a celebrity at a restaurant.
I was like, 16 years old.
And they go, did you get a selfie? I go, no.
And they go, why not? I go, because you didn't have one.
You lived in a moment.
You did it. They asked you if you got a selfie back in the day.
You're like, no. We didn't even have cell phones.
There was a cell phone, but it didn't have a camera attached to it.
That didn't exist.
And also, if you did get a selfie, there was nowhere to put it because social media, MySpace had just started.
But there was nothing to do it with.
There was nothing to add it with. And there are now generations of kids who live more of their life on their phone and in the internet and on social media than they do in real life.
And, you know, there's a book called Generations by Gene Tweege, something like that.
And it talks a lot about how this generation, like mine probably being one of the last ones to not have internet in every moment of their life, is really...
Impacted them mentally.
I think that a lot of things we're seeing when it comes to younger people, even like the transgender stuff where you're seeing, you know, transgender surgeries or transgender feelings, whereas always like 75% male to female who started feeling this at the age of like two.
Now it's 75% female to male who felt it at 15, 16 years old.
And I think a lot of it is social contagion from the internet.
A lot of... Bad actors are on the internet.
And a lot of parents, especially parents who are maybe Gen Xers who had kids later on in life when they were in their late 30s or early 40s, I think they're far behind what's really going on on their social media.
So I think it's good that Governor Sanders is sitting there and saying something has to be done.
Let's, as a 50 governors in a bipartisan way, let's talk about how we're going to sit there and start changing some stuff.
Hmm. So how do you do it from like a governor perspective?
Because I feel like if you're a parent, you could say, okay, you, you know, you don't, you don't have the phone, sorry, you're, you're eight years old, and you're not gonna have internet, and all these things.
And so I feel like parents just, they just can't give their kids these phones.
But if you are a governor, or you're looking over a classroom, what do you do?
Well, I mean, some, we do this for my PAC, for the 1776 project, we look at education reform and what we're doing and what people are doing.
Some school districts in some states have started mandating that kids put their phones in, like, pockets, like, in, like, against the wall, like, you know, where, you know what a shoe, like, a shoe thing against the wall is, like, a shoe rack?
Yeah, they, like, take your phone and keep it there during the class.
Right, they put them in there, right. They've been doing that so you can't text or in class because it's highly distracting and obviously people cheat on tests.
And I think Governor DeSantis has started sitting there and saying no social media before you're 16.
You cannot sign up for social media.
Other countries are doing that in Europe where they're saying you cannot sign up for social media before you were 16.
It's so detrimental to your mental health.
I would not be surprised if some people started doing it.
I mean, also, Europe is way ahead of us saying, hey, you can't have transgender surgery while you're young or hormone blockers.
It's actually horrendously bad for your health.
I think that there's a real conversation saying to social media companies, no, you cannot sign up nine-year-olds on your platforms.
Like, it's just really, really, really so devastating to their mental health over time.
But that's one thing is checking in their phones.
And obviously, with classroom curriculum, they have an immense amount of resources to sit there and say, you know, we're not going to use, you know, if we use smart board technology, not every kid's going to get a laptop When they're five years old, we're going to sit there and switch back to textbooks or to, I don't know, more interactive learning instruction.
There's a lot of things that the governor can do, obviously, within the classroom, you know, but I don't know how much they can do in terms of what you do at home.
Obviously, a parent wants their kid on TikTok, the kicking on TikTok.
Wow. Okay.
Well, let's talk a little bit about international politics.
So maybe you can tell us a little bit.
I guess I'm biased because of my family in India.
But let's talk about Indian politics.
So when he wins re-election, he, I think, kind of like...
It's so funny because he had won the majority yesterday and I woke up this morning and they were still counting votes and he had lost his absolute majority.
He's still the largest party in India, but he's going to have to go into a...
What do you call it? A coalition government with some of the independent parties.
He did lose his absolute majority, which was pretty surprising because he was set to win it.
He was way above in the polls.
Modi has been the leader of India now for, this would be his third term, if he can get a coalition government going.
He is very much a nationalist leader.
He's been a unifier for large segments of India.
He's a Hindu nationalist.
He's got very close relations with certain American politicians like Governor Greg Abbott from Texas and President Trump he was very close to.
And he's considered a right-wing populist.
He's been very big on infrastructure, getting universal indoor plumbing, has been a big part of his time as president.
And he was also very big about deporting illegal aliens from Bangladesh to the millions.
But yeah, I think what the left campaigned so aggressively on in India was trying to get stronger affirmative action for different minority groups within India, especially among the Muslim population.
And Maybe it worked.
I mean, maybe the surge in voting was enough to sit there and to, you know, do that.
That's what happened in Venezuela, too, by the way, right before they went socialist, was they really went to minorities within the nation and said, you have to vote for us because we share your ethnic heritage.
We will get more resources from the majority population, majority economic population.
And, you know, you're poor.
It's the politics of envy.
You're poor because they're rich.
So let's move that money around.
Yeah. Do you feel like that's the pattern we're just going to see everywhere?
It's like, it's just going to be mirrored?
Either you're A conglomerate of these minority groups or people who feel like they've been slighted or you're this other group and it's just going to be the two fighting.
Because in many ways, I feel like it doesn't have to be like that.
It could be based on values or other things.
It doesn't have to be that. But do you think that that's where it's going in generally?
That's definitely the politics of the left.
The politics of the left is saying to people, you are poor because someone else is wealthy.
You are not succeeding, not because of luck or skill or the million reasons in life that things don't work for somebody.
It's only because the system was built against you to work against you and it's built for them and not you.
India, obviously, is a much different place than the United States.
It's a much poorer place than the United States, and there are certain populations within India that are extremely poor.
And they have high ethnic tensions between the Muslims and the Hindus in that nation.
But if you look all over the world, I'm writing a piece from my sub-stack right now about the Indians, the ethnic Indians who moved to Africa In the 1960s and 70s, and they were extraordinarily successful.
I mean, they became the top 1% of every country they moved to in Africa.
And the politicians started running saying that Indians were stealing their works, stealing their jobs, stealing their fortunes, stealing their money, and they needed to be excised out.
Same thing happened against the white farmers in Zimbabwe and now South Africa.
Same thing happened with the Descendants of conquistadors in Venezuela and the ethnic Chinese in the Philippines and the ethnic Chinese in Vietnam.
It's very difficult for any society when there is an economic dominant minority.
So when a minority group in any population is extremely wealthy, extremely successful, has over-representation in areas of influence, they are oftentimes demonized and otherized and told that to other people, they're getting away from you because they're taking advantage of you because of some outside thing.
That's part of the reason you're seeing so much anti-Semitism in our country right now.
And I think that it's very, very, very troublesome and very, very worried.
And, you know, we'll see where it goes.
And hopefully Modi's able to make a coalition government because he's been very good with the United States and with the West on many, many issues, especially when it comes to China and Islamic terrorists.
So I hope he's able to get the third term.
Yeah, definitely. Well, tell us a little bit about Trudeau pushing amnesty.
Oh my gosh. So if you guys...
Trudeau. Trudeau.
Yeah. So if Justin Trudeau, the Prime Minister of Canada, who has also, I think, been there now for three terms, Trudeau is right now in his last term.
He is not term...
Limited, but the Liberal Party of Canada is having its poll numbers so far.
Their next election will be the worst performance of the Liberal Party in its history, so much so that it may not exist as a functioning party anymore.
No, no, no. Yeah.
Something to look forward to.
Yeah, I mean, the Sikh population, he's losing them two to one.
He's losing the young population by a landslide.
He's losing every single demographic, not only demographic as far as voter goes, but demographic within his coalition.
It's going to be a bloodbath for Justin Trudeau for the next election, which is in 2025.
And he knows it.
So everything he's doing right now, he is trying to jam as much possibly in before the ship finally sinks and the Liberal Party is not a functioning party anymore.
So one thing he's trying to do.
What is he trying to do?
An amnesty. He's trying to get a 300,000 person amnesty.
Now remember, Canada's population is about a tenth of ours, or was a tenth of ours.
Justin Trudeau increased legal immigration in a nation of 35 million people to a million people per year.
That would be something close to America taking in 100 million people.
It is astronomically high and what has happened in the last two years and last couple years of him doing this is there's a housing crisis, a massive housing crisis all over Canada.
There is ethnic tensions all over Canada.
The economy is now in its seventh straight quarter of GDP per capita decline.
There's very high inflation throughout Canada.
It is a very, very, very bad situation.
Canadian immigration to the United States has never been higher.
People are trying to get to Canada as fast as possible because Trudeau has destroyed that country so much.
So he's trying to shove through a 350,000 person amnesty before the election, hoping that this will generate more voters for him.
But the writing is on the wall.
The fat lady is singing.
The guy on the Titanic is playing the violin.
The ship is going down.
And he is just sitting there and trying to do whatever he can in the next few months to salvage a very, very bad time as prime minister.
And he's really run to the country for a very long time.
Wow. Oh, my gosh.
Well, that's awful. But at least people are waking up to what's going on and realizing that...
They can't keep electing people like that.
He's going to go from over 200 members of parliament to less than 90.
I mean, they are going to be...
The Conservative Party of Canada is probably not only going to be the largest party, but it will have a super majority to really pass whatever they want.
And because Canada is a federal system, not a national system, the provinces of Canada have immense influences of what they will accept and what they won't accept.
So the provinces have been rejecting a lot of his positions.
The provinces have a lot of power.
They have more power than our states do.
They even have power over how many inputs they take in and where they go.
So they have been pushing back and rejecting a lot of Trudeau stuff for some time now, but I mean it's a full out rebellion and he's just trying to get whatever he can in before it all comes crashing down in 2025.
And it will be, I mean, it will be the end of Justin Trudeau and the Liberal Party as we know it.
Wow.
Oh, he is such a joke.
Well, last question.
So EU elections are days away.
What are your predictions?
So the EU elections, EU parliamentary elections.
So there's some coalitions.
On the right, there's the EPP, which is the European People's Party.
They are the center-right party.
That's Angela Merkel's old party.
Then there is the ID, that is the Identity and Democracy Coalition.
That is Marine Le Pen's party.
They are very nationalistic.
Very, very, very skeptical of the EU. They were always seen as probably more pro-Russia.
And then there's the ECR, the European Conservatives and Reformists.
That is Giorgio Maloney's party, the Prime Minister of Italy's party.
What is happening right now is there's a lot of moving parts.
The current head of the EU, the president of the EU, she is under threat from her coalition.
Now, the coalition that runs the EU is the center-left, the center-right, and the centrist.
It's basically a Macron party, a Kahn-Steiner party, although he's not in the EU, but a center-leftist party, and the EPP.
And they run a centrist coalition.
What is happening is that Macron especially wants to get rid of the current president of the EU because they feel like she is cozied up.
She's a member of the center-right party.
She's cozied up to nationalists a lot.
She's cozied up to Orban.
She's cozied up to Maloney.
And there's a lot of criticism that she's blaming two right-wing for the European Parliament.
But the ID, the Identity and Democracy Party, Marine Le Pen's coalition, is going to come in first place in places like France, places like Austria, places like the Netherlands.
And Maloney's party, the ECR coalition, will come in first in like Italy, Poland.
Poland, and a bunch of other places.
If they can cobble together some kind of coalition with Victor Orban, who belongs to no coalition, Victor Orban's Fidesz party, the ECR, the European Conservatives and Reformists, and the ID and the EPP, They have the opportunity for the very first time in European history to make a right-wing coalition that governs the party.
There are tensions now between coalitions related to migration, related to green energy politics is a major, major focal point.
What the center-left in Europe is trying to do is make the Green New Deal of Europe.
And even centrist right-wing people are saying, this is too far.
You're going to destroy our economy.
We cannot go along with you.
And that will be really, I think, one of the breaking points.
It was one of the breaking points for the Netherlands over inflation and over what they're doing with farmers.
So I think that this is going to be the big, big question is, can they get enough votes where they have, I think, I think it's 376 European parliamentary seats to form a right wing coalition.
Le Pen has offered it to Maloney.
Fidesz or Viktor Orban's party has offered it to Maloney, where they make a right wing coalition and a center right wing coalition.
And if they merge it, it will be a transformative moment in European politics.
But we'll have to see if they get enough seats.
Wow.
So if they do that, if they had this right wing alliance and Trump won, that would be crazy, right?
Because we would have great things going on in these places that are seriously disturbed.
I mean, America, Europe, they're kind of declining, and they've been taken over by liberals.
So hopefully there can be some about turn there to take them to some level of sanity for the sake of people in the West.
Yeah. Right.
And I mean, especially when it comes to China.
Maloney has been a giant China hawk.
So has the EPP. So has the ID. There's been talks about how to realign the world away from China in some capacity.
They don't agree on everything, and there are some major tensions between all coalitions, but they are absolutely opposed to the Green New Deal politics.
They are absolutely opposed to China and the influence of China.
They are very hawkish on Russia, and they are afraid of a Russia invading Poland.
So all these things are moving in their general consensus, and if Macron and his coalition tries to oust The EPP as the governing party of Europe, which they've been for some time now, we'll see her probably make moves to sustain and protect her time as president.
So, I mean, it will be very, very interesting.
And that's, I think, the election's either tomorrow or the next day.
It's very, very close.
Wow. Well, very exciting.
Well, Ryan, thanks so much for joining us and offering your thoughts.
Always so good to talk to you.
Thank you so much. Follow me on Substack for the National Populous Newsletter.
Well, that wraps up today's show.
If you enjoyed the show, make sure to follow me on social media.
If you like the episode, you can find me on Facebook, Instagram, X, True Social, all the places.
I am at Danielle D'Souza Gill.
That's where you can find my videos, thoughts, content, all those things.
Well, I'll see you tomorrow.
MAGA! Subscribe to the Dinesh D'Souza Podcast on Apple, Google, and Spotify.
▲
Export Selection